Hopefully, Emma Woollacott, Forbes contributor, published an article about the copyright wars.

Summarily, quite decorative objects are protected by copyright but their useful purpose isn’t as they’re covered by patents, Emma Woollacott stated. So, many functional objects are actually unpatented. Michael Weinberg of Public Knowledge, who has written a white paper about the legal implications of 3D printing, says, “This leads to some tricky cases” and he points out, “Sometimes useful articles can also be decorative. A vase is a container to hold water and flowers, but it can also be a work of art in its own right,”

Weinberg also warns, “It is critical for today’s 3D printing community, tucked away in garages, hackerspaces, and labs, to keep a vigilant eye on these policy debates as they grow,” in his paper. “There will be a time when impacted legacy industries demand some sort of DMCA for 3D printing. If the 3D printing community waits until that day to organize, it will be too late.”